Conservation Status of Crayfish Species Paddlefish Conservation ...

OPINION:
FARm BIll
Farm Bill 2007:
Placing Fisheries upstream of
conservation Provisions
overview
Although policy issues likely cause most
fisheries professionals to feel sleepy and
move on to more enticing reading material,
we hope that our colleagues will take the
time to explore the implications of upcoming
reauthorization of the u.S. Farm Bill.
The name of the bill may imply corn and
cattle; however, it is potentially the most
influential aquatic conservation legislation to
be considered by the u.S. federal government
and requires the focused attention of
all fisheries and aquaculture professionals,
especially those within the united States.
Below, we describe the history and inner
workings of this legislation and provide a
list of issues to be addressed in the 2007
version of the Farm Bill. By understanding
this bill, contributing to its genesis, and
fully participating in its implementation as
fisheries scientists, we have the opportunity
to benefit fisheries resources immensely
and create an important precedent for a
future technical presence in the process.
iNtrodUCtioN
The 2002 Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act (i.e., the Farm Bill) is slated
for reauthorization in 2007. This legislation
is vast and complex; the amount of
fiscal resources appropriated (> $1 billion
annually) by the u.S. congress to conservation
(i.e., promoting the sustainable
use of natural resources) within this bill is
considerable and equivalent to or greater
than the conservation budgets within other
resource-oriented agencies (e.g., u.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service). A Farm Bill has existed
in some form since the dust Bowl era when
it provided funding for soil conservation
and implementation of improved farming
techniques. In the mid-1980s, Farm Bill provisions
dramatically expanded in scope by
increasing the reach of agriculture-related
conservation programs. The 2002 Farm Bill
was even more comprehensive, expanding
incentives for practicing sound conservation
and setting aside land in protected reserves.
Mention of aquatic conservation, particularly
as it relates to fisheries, is scarce in
the 2002 Farm Bill language. The linkages
among sound agricultural and forestry
practices, water quality, and aquatic habitat
integrity are implied rather than explicitly
stated. In recent years, the importance of
land use to aquatic ecosystems, resident
fishes, and other aquatic organisms has
become exceedingly clear (e.g., Naiman
and Turner 2000; Vanni et al. 2005; Hughes
et al. 2006). unlike identifying the effects
of point-source pollutants, which can be
directly quantified as water leaves the
pipes, non-point sources such as those
typically associated with farming, ranching,
and forestry are often difficult to precisely
quantify and relate to aquatic resources.
However, improved geographic-based tools
for assessing land use and other technological
advances such as intensified computer
modeling power have greatly improved our
ability to link land use patterns to aquatic
ecosystems and fisheries at local, regional,
national, and even global scales. Given
recent Internet access to free and easy-touse
geographic-information programs, it
has become very easy for professionals and
laypeople alike to envision the complex and
far-reaching relationships between land and
water: a lake, stream, or ocean is always
downhill. For example, seasonal hypoxia in
the Gulf of Mexico is now believed to be
a consequence of the widespread use of
nitrogen-based fertilizers in the Mississippi
River basin (Scott et al. 2007). loss of fishery
production due to this phenomenon as well
as impacts of agriculture-related activities
on other aquatic systems is a major concern
of fisheries professionals. Riparian disturbance,
and excess nutrients and sediments
are the major stressors of 25-30% of u.S.
streams, with those percentages increasing
in agricultural regions (Stoddard et al. 2005;
uSepA 2006). The conservation programs
outlined within the next Farm Bill should
provide opportunities by which fisheries
biologists and aquatic scientists can begin
to tackle global and local problems such as
stream channelization, headwater loss, and,
more generally, aquatic habitat degradation.
There are indeed opportunities for
fisheries professionals to influence the
direction of Farm Bill programs ,as outlined
2007 Farm Bill Advisory
committee of the American
Fisheries Society
The committee is chaired by James
e. Garvey, Fisheries and Illinois
Aquaculture center, Southern Illinois
university, carbondale. Garvey can
be contacted at jgarvey@siu.edu.
previously by many authors (pajak et al.
1994; pajak 2000; Thomas et al. 2001). To
do so in the next bill, we should explicitly
outline relationships between land use
(both agricultural and urban) and fisheries.
The Farm Bill is an extremely long and
complicated piece of legislation. In this
white paper, we will not review the bill
in its entirety. Throughout the bill, provisions
exist that affect fisheries, such as
funding for land-grant universities where
many fisheries programs reside. We limit
our effort to reviewing some of the most
germane programs in the previous Farm
Bill that have had direct implications for
fish conservation and fisheries resources.
We then discuss the pros and cons of the
recent u.S. department of Agriculture
(uSdA) proposal for the 2007 Farm Bill as it
pertains to fisheries and aquatic ecosystem
condition . We close with some recommendations
for the upcoming legislation and
the participation of the fisheries profession
in future Farm Bill-related programs.
2002 FArm biLL: A SHort Primer
The 2002 Farm Bill is divided into major
subsections, with the one called “Title II:
conservation and enhancement” being
most germane to fisheries. This section
contains most of the major provisions for
conservation, including many well-known
programs such as the Wetlands Reserve
program (WRp) and conservation Reserve
program (cRp). However, other programs
not included in Title II can have indirect
socioeconomic effects on fisheries. To
illustrate, fluctuations in the environment
and markets translate to variable economic
returns in agriculture; government support
is occasionally required to maintain farming
as a viable economic option. Thus, Farm Bill
programs can affect the balance between
farming and other forms of land use (e.g.,
urbanization) within many regions, influencing
aquatic condition, human perceptions
of natural resources, and behavior of the
fishing public. Fisheries science cannot
afford to ignore the indirect effects of these
programs on human use of the environment,
aquatic resources, and fisheries.
Fisheries • vol 32 no 8 • august 2007 • www.fisheries.org 399